(05-02-2014 04:22 PM)Just Another Atheist Wrote: Im not sure if I should face palm at something like this or think about it.

I thought about it and I came back to the idea that THEY have the burden of proof. Not believing in God whilst accepting the possibility of there being one would technically be the default position.

He then went on to say Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence… Aww man, sometimes I know how Bill Nye feels.

I've used this example before in a previous post in another thread, which is: what if we ran our legal system using the creationist burden of proof argument:

Plaintiff: "Your honor, I am suing the defendant for $1,000 which I loaned him."
Defendant: "Your honor, I have never even met this man, let alone borrow money from him."
Judge (to defendant): "Sir, do you have any proof that this man DIDN'T loan you $1,000?"
Defendant: "No your honor. How could I disprove something like that? He has absolutely no proof that he ever lent me any money. He has no cancelled check, no signed agreement that he loaned me the money, or any witness to him loaning me the money!"
Judge (to defendant): I'm sorry sir, but the burden of proof is on you, so unless you can prove that he did not loan you the money, then you have to pay this man. Judgement in favor of the plaintiff for the amount of $1,000!"

The sheer idiocy of such thinking is blatantly obvious to anyone, right? So why is this same idiotic line of thinking logical when it comes to claiming the existence of deities? Are there any creationists here that use the "Burden of proof is on the atheists argument" here that can answer that question?

“Religion was invented when the first con man met the first fool.” - Mark Twain

But why do you believe there is no god? Because there is absolutely no evidence, indication or even a reason for a god to exist. God has become completely unneccessary to explain or understand things.

Finally, I would suggest you to question him with polite and naive questions, like I have done here. Ask him about god, where he is, what he is, what he looks like and ask him how he knows that. Because for such an extraordinary claim, surely a reasonable person as your friend has a good argument or reason to believe that.

Frankly, I believe that the universe did not have an extrinsic force which lead to its creation. I am currently of the opinion that it is quite plausible that quantum mechanical processes might have created our universe. I believe this, because this theory is being presented with very good arguments, calculations and fits experimental data. It is not proven by any means. But the burden of proof was sufficiently satisfied to convince people.

Having said that, quantum mechanical processes are part of nature, therefore I do infact believe that nature is self-creating in that sense.

(05-02-2014 09:25 PM)Youkay Wrote: Frankly, I believe that the universe did not have an extrinsic force which lead to its creation. I am currently of the opinion that it is quite plausible that quantum mechanical processes might have created our universe. I believe this, because this theory is being presented with very good arguments, calculations and fits experimental data. It is not proven by any means. But the burden of proof was sufficiently satisfied to convince people.

Having said that, quantum mechanical processes are part of nature, therefore I do infact believe that nature is self-creating in that sense.

Or is something else implied in that previous statement?

Don't worry, the troll will make something up and present it even more unintelligibly.